Talk:Mass Effect: Revelation
which year is Revelation set? :2165. The Timeline has dates for when the novels are set. --Tullis 12:29, 1 September 2009 (UTC) New section? Is there room here in this article for a part about errors or contradicting information between this book and other sources? I came across some while reading it... Deeeee 00:57, August 18, 2010 (UTC) :Like what exactly? Examples are always a good idea for something like this. Lancer1289 01:02, August 18, 2010 (UTC) ::(edit conflict) Hmmm... now you've gone and peaked my interest. What sort of information? SpartHawg948 01:02, August 18, 2010 (UTC) :::For instance: the book said the Citadel had 40 million inhabitants, while the in game codex indicated a lot less. In the book the council sat down on seats (unlike in the game, where they are always standing). In the book, the council room is large enough to hold 10.000 spectators... I don't remember any more out of my head, but as I am concentrating on Revelation articles right now, I will come across some more, I think. What do you think? Deeeee 11:30, August 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::I would have to say that those three aren't really worth noting as there could be some explanations. To the 40 Million, it may include the keepers in that statement, which was corrected in the Codex. On the other hand, a lot of people left between 2165 and 2183, it’s possible. As to the seating, the book says thousands, not a specific number. As to why they aren't seen, maybe the Council had them removed, and restyled the Council Chamber in the 18 year period. Finally to the Council sitting, maybe they took a page from Admiral Cain's book about chairs and prolonging meetings, "so out went the chairs". They really aren't errors, just things that were probably done in the 18-year interim between Mass Effect: Revelation and Mass Effect. A lot can happen in 18 years, especially in a large community like the Citadel. Lancer1289 15:44, August 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::::Yeah, populations can fluctuate greatly over the course of two decades, so I'd hesitate to call that an inconsistency. Chairs have this odd ability to be moved, and sometimes removed, which does generally happen a few times over the course of two decades. Also, and I admit, I just glanced over the relevant passages, so I may have missed something: I recall seeing it mentioned that the Council was already seated, but not anything about them being sitting. Now, this may seem like a silly semantic trick, but recall that seated has multiple definitions, one of which is in session. Any government agency can be described as seated if they are in place ready to fulfill their function. I believe this is even supported by in-game dialogue, people always talking about humans getting 'a seat on the Council'. As for spectators, remember that there do appear to be rooms branching off from the chamber that we cannot access. Spectator stands? I would have no problem with inconsistencies being brought up in the article (different books, but for example, the Jon Grissom age discrepancy in Ascension and Retribution), but things like furniture arrangement and population that will inevitably change a bit over two decades isn't really choice material. It needs to be more substantive. SpartHawg948 19:38, August 19, 2010 (UTC) :::::I forgot about those extra rooms and the walls on the upper level near the balconies, they could retract to reveal the stands. We do need something that can't be explained by simple explanations. Lancer1289 19:42, August 19, 2010 (UTC) :::Ok, I think I get it: these examples shouldn't be in the 'errors' section. If I find a real one, i'll let you know. If you find any, please let me now :) For now, I won't add any to the article. Deeeee 20:52, August 19, 2010 (UTC) ::::Sounds good! Also, if we do find any, how about 'Continuity Errors' for the (proposed) section title? Error sounds a bit vague, whereas continuity errors tells you exactly what kind of mistake it is. SpartHawg948 20:54, August 19, 2010 (UTC) How about this line? "He was easily the most impressive krogan Edan had ever seen. At two and a half meters tall and nearly two hundred kilograms, he was large even by the standards of his reptilian species, but not enormous." Does this imply that the armor Krogans wear is around 700-800 kg? Because the Alternate Appearance Pack 2 states: "How do you make Grunt feel at home? You can start by encasing him in 100 kilos of bullet-resistant plating!" Which possibly implies that the new armor is 100 kg, or that you are adding 100 kg to his existing armor... Honestly, I don't consider the "Alternate Appearance Pack 2" to be a big deal, since it's flavor text for a small DLC and was probably written haphazardly, but the whole "almost 200 kg unarmored yet around 900-1000 kg in armor" seems like a big jump to me, unless the armor is made out of tungsten, gold, plutonium, platinum, or something else with a ridiculous density. --Murderofcrows 22:14, December 29, 2011 (UTC) Change Trilogy to Quadrology This series of books is no longer a trilogy. Therefore I think it should the words trilogy should be changed to quadrology. :That sentence is referring to the trilogy of Mass Effect games, not the books. The current usage is correct. -- Commdor (Talk) 01:46, May 1, 2011 (UTC)